法華經義記 6.18

6.18

「然世尊先知我等心著弊欲」此下訖「於此大乘無有志求」以來作三句，合上第五教作人譬。上譬中本有三階，第一教作緣由，第二正教作，第三明作人就作稱可長者意。今者合此三段皆盡，但闕略而已。先合第一教作緣由，本有三段，第一先明長者見子，第二言捨貴人服飾，第三言受賤人服飾，即是捨法身受應身。今者唯合第一階，不合後二階也。但第一階長者見子中本有三，一言「又以他日」明見子之時，今不合。第二言「於窓牖中」明見子之處，今者亦不合。唯合第三正見子。上明見子言「遙見子身羸瘦憔悴污穢不淨」，于時唯有小機不堪為說大，故言「先知我等深著蔽欲」下訖「不為分別寶藏之分」也。

From "Yet the World-Honoured One previously knew that our minds were attached to base desires" down to "in this Great Vehicle had no aspiration or seeking" forms three lines, matching the fifth parable above, of instructing him to become a hired laborer. In the parable above, there were originally three steps: first, the reason for instructing him to work; second, directly instructing him to work; third, explaining that the laborer took up the work, conforming to the elder's intention. Now these three sections are all completely matched, only being abridged. First, matching the first [step], the reason for instructing him to work: originally there were three sections. First, it initially explained the elder seeing the son; second, it spoke of shedding the attire of an eminent person; third, it spoke of taking up the attire of a base person, which is shedding the Dharma-body to assume the response-body. Now it only matches the first step, not matching the latter two steps. However, in the first step of the elder seeing the son, there were originally three points: one said "again on another day," explaining the time of seeing the son, which is not matched now; the second said "through the window," explaining the place of seeing the son, which is also not matched now. It only matches the third, directly seeing the son. Above, explaining seeing the son said, "seeing from afar the son's body emaciated, haggard, and filthy with defilement." At that time he had only the small capacity and was not fit to have the great preached to him; hence it says "previously knew that we were deeply attached to base desires" down to "did not distinguish for us our share of the treasure store."